[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

"How Europe Fell Behind"

"The Epstein Conspiracy in Plain Sight"

Saint Nicholas The Real St. Nick

Will Atheists in China Starve Due to No Fish to Eat?

A Thirteen State Solution for the Holy Land?

US Sends new Missle to a Pacific ally, angering China and Russia Moscow and Peoking

DeaTh noTice ... Freerepublic --- lasT Monday JR died

"‘We Are Not the Crazy Ones’: AOC Protests Too Much"

"Rep. Comer to Newsmax: No Evidence Biden Approved Autopen Use"

"Donald Trump Has Broken the Progressive Ratchet"

"America Must Slash Red Tape to Make Nuclear Power Great Again!!"

"Why the DemocRATZ Activist Class Couldn’t Celebrate the Cease-Fire They Demanded"

Antifa Calls for CIVIL WAR!

British Police Make an Arrest...of a White Child Fishing in the Thames

"Sanctuary" Horde ASSAULTS Chicago... ELITE Marines SMASH Illegals Without Mercy

Trump hosts roundtable on ANTIFA

What's happening in Britain. Is happening in Ireland. The whole of Western Europe.

"The One About the Illegal Immigrant School Superintendent"

CouldnÂ’t believe he let me pet him at the end (Rhino)

Cops Go HANDS ON For Speaking At Meeting!

POWERFUL: Charlie Kirk's final speech delivered in South Korea 9/6/25

2026 in Bible Prophecy

2.4 Billion exposed to excessive heat

🔴 LIVE CHICAGO PORTLAND ICE IMMIGRATION DETENTION CENTER 24/7 PROTEST 9/28/2025

Young Conservative Proves Leftist Protesters Wrong

England is on the Brink of Civil War!

Charlie Kirk Shocks Florida State University With The TRUTH

IRL Confronting Protesters Outside UN Trump Meeting

The UK Revolution Has Started... Brit's Want Their Country Back

Inside Paris Dangerous ANTIFA Riots

Rioters STORM Chicago ICE HQ... "Deportation Unit" SCRAPES Invaders Off The Sidewalk

She Decoded A Specific Part In The Bible

Muslim College Student DUMBFOUNDED as Charlie Kirk Lists The Facts About Hamas

Charlie Kirk EVISCERATES Black Students After They OPENLY Support “Anti-White Racism” HEATED DEBATE

"Trump Rips U.N. as Useless During General Assembly Address: ‘Empty Words’"

Charlie Kirk VS the Wokies at University of Tennessee

Charlie Kirk Takes on 3 Professors & a Teacher

British leftist student tells Charlie Kirk facts are unfair

The 2 Billion View Video: Charlie Kirk's Most Viewed Clips of 2024

Antifa is now officially a terrorist organization.

The Greatness of Charlie Kirk: An Eyewitness Account of His Life and Martyrdom

Charlie Kirk Takes on Army of Libs at California's UCR

DR. ALVEDA KING: REST IN PEACE CHARLIE KIRK

Steven Bonnell wants to murder Americans he disagrees with

What the fagots LGBTQ really means

I watched Charlie Kirk get assassinated. This is my experience.

Elon Musk Delivers Stunning Remarks At Historic UK March (Tommy Robinson)

"Transcript: Mrs. Erika Kirk Delivers Public Address: ‘His Movement Will Go On’"

"Victor Davis Hanson to Newsmax: Kirk Slaying Crosses Rubicon"

Rest In Peace Charlie Kirk


Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Mexican Invasion
See other Mexican Invasion Articles

Title: MIDTERM EXIT POLLS: 75% REJECT EXEC AMNESTY, 80% DON'T WANT FOREIGN WORKERS TAKING JOBS FROM AMERICANS
Source: [None]
URL Source: http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Govern ... ers-Taking-Jobs-from-Americans
Published: Nov 8, 2014
Author: TONY LEE
Post Date: 2014-11-08 22:02:16 by out damned spot
Keywords: amnesty, jobs
Views: 4635
Comments: 13

Americans who voted in the midterms on Tuesday overwhelming are opposed to President Barack Obama's executive amnesty and do not want foreign workers to take jobs from Americans and legal immigrants who are already here.

An exit poll conducting by Kellyanne Conway's The Polling Company found that three-quarters (74%) of voters believed that "President Obama should work with

Congress rather than around Congress on immigration and separately." Americans who voted in the midterms on Tuesday overwhelming are opposed to President Barack Obama's executive amnesty and do not want foreign workers to take jobs from Americans and legal immigrants who are already here.

An exit poll conducting by Kellyanne Conway's The Polling Company found that three-quarters (74%) of voters believed that "President Obama should work with Congress rather than around Congress on immigration and separately."

Overall, strong "majorities of men (75%), women (74%), whites (79%), blacks (59%), and Hispanics (54%)," in addition to tri-partisan majorities of "self- identified Republicans (92%), Independents (80%), and Democrats (51%)" did not want Obama to enact an executive amnesty on his own. Only 20% of voters wanted Obama to move forward with his executive amnesty.

"The President may be the last person in town to realize how resistant Americans are to him playing the Lone Ranger on amnesty," the polling memo stated. "In fact, based on his press conference yesterday, he has either suspended disbelief or has no awareness of how the immigration issue and his threats to act alone contributed to his party suffering massive losses on Tuesday."

Obama may also grant work permits to millions of illegal immigrants and give the tech industry nearly a million more guest-worker permits via executive amnesty.

But 80% of voters surveyed wanted "new jobs created by the economy to go to American workers and legal immigrants already in the country." The view was shared across all regions---74% in the Northeast, 80% in the Midwest, 85% in the South, and 80% in the West--and among men and women (no gender gap).

As the Polling Company noted, these numbers turn "on its head the elitist idea that illegal immigrants 'do the jobs that Americans don't want to do.'"

"Voters overwhelmingly prefer an immigration system that protects American workers," the polling memo states. "Therefore members of Congress should feel confident that voters will support actions using the power of the purse to protect American workers from Obama’s executive amnesty threat."

But even after Democrats were thumped on Tuesday, Obama said he would enact his executive amnesty, which may include granting work permits to millions of illegal immigrants that would allow them to legally compete with American workers for nearly every job.

The Polling Company poll was conducted on Election Day, November 4, and has a margin of error of +/- 3.5 percentage points.Overall, strong "majorities of men (75%), women (74%), whites (79%), blacks (59%), and Hispanics (54%)," in addition to tri-partisan majorities of "self-identified Republicans (92%), Independents (80%), and Democrats (51%)" did not want Obama to enact an executive amnesty on his own. Only 20% of voters wanted Obama to move forward with his executive amnesty.

"The President may be the last person in town to realize how resistant Americans are to him playing the Lone Ranger on amnesty," the polling memo stated. "In fact, based on his press conference yesterday, he has either suspended disbelief or has no awareness of how the immigration issue and his threats to act alone contributed to his party suffering massive losses on Tuesday."

Obama may also grant work permits to millions of illegal immigrants and give the tech industry nearly a million more guest-worker permits via executive amnesty.

But 80% of voters surveyed wanted "new jobs created by the economy to go to American workers and legal immigrants already in the country." The view was shared across all regions---74% in the Northeast, 80% in the Midwest, 85% in the South, and 80% in the West--and among men and women (no gender gap).

As the Polling Company noted, these numbers turn "on its head the elitist idea that illegal immigrants 'do the jobs that Americans don't want to do.'"

"Voters overwhelmingly prefer an immigration system that protects American workers," the polling memo states. "Therefore members of Congress should feel confident that voters will support actions using the power of the purse to protect American workers from Obama’s executive amnesty threat."

But even after Democrats were thumped on Tuesday, Obama said he would enact his executive amnesty, which may include granting work permits to millions of illegal immigrants that would allow them to legally compete with American workers for nearly every job.

The Polling Company poll was conducted on Election Day, November 4, and has a margin of error of +/- 3.5 percentage points.

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 9.

#6. To: out damned spot (#0)

An exit poll conducting by Kellyanne Conway's The Polling Company found that three-quarters (74%) of voters believed that "President Obama should work with Congress rather than around Congress on immigration and separately."

Where in hell does this admnistration claim the power to act separately exists?

U.S. Supreme Court

Fong Yue Ting v. United States, 149 U.S. 698, 711-712 (1893)

The right to exclude or to expel all aliens, or any class of aliens, absolutely or upon certain conditions, in war or in peace, being an inherent and inalienable right of every sovereign and independent nation, essential to its safety, its independence, and its welfare, the question now before the Court is whether the manner in which Congress has exercised this right in sections 6 and 7 of the act of 1892 is consistent with the Constitution.

The United States are a sovereign and independent nation, and are vested by the Constitution with the entire control of international relations, and with all the powers of Government necessary to maintain that control, and to make it effective. The only Government of this country which other nations recognize or treat with is the Government of the Union, and the only American flag known throughout the world is the flag of the United States.

The Constitution of the United States speaks with no uncertain sound upon this subject. That instrument, established by the people of the United States as the fundamental law of the land, has conferred upon the President the executive power; has made him the Commander in Chief of the army and navy; has authorized him, by and with the consent of the

149 U. S. 712

Senate, to make treaties, and to appoint ambassadors, public ministers, and consuls; and has made it his duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed. The Constitution has granted to Congress the power to regulate commerce with foreign nations, including the entrance of ships, the importation of goods, and the bringing of persons into the ports of the United States; to establish a uniform rule of naturalization; to define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the high seas, and offenses against the law of nations; to declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water; to raise and support armies, to provide and maintain a navy, and to make rules for the Government and regulation of the land and naval forces; and to make all laws necessary and proper for carrying into execution these powers, and all other powers vested by the Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof. And the several States are expressly forbidden to enter into any treaty, alliance, or confederation; to grant letters of marque and reprisal; to enter into any agreement or compact with another State, or with a foreign power; or to engage in war, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent danger as will not admit of delay.

[emphasis added]

Fong Yue Ting v. United States, 149 U.S. 698, 713 (1893)

The power to exclude or to expel aliens, being a power affecting international relations, is vested in the political departments of the Government, and is to be regulated by treaty or by act of Congress, and to be executed by the executive authority according to the regulations so established, except so far the Judicial Department has been authorized by treaty or by statute, or is required by the paramount law of the Constitution, to intervene.

[emphasis added]

nolu chan  posted on  2014-11-13   23:27:57 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#9. To: nolu chan (#6)

Where in hell does this administration claim the power to act separately exists?

Chief Law Enforcement Officer. - The President has the sole constitutional obligation to "take care that the laws be faithfully executed,"17 and this grants him broad discretion over federal law enforcement decisions. He has not only the power, but also the responsibility to see that the Constitution and laws are interpreted correctly.18 In addition, the President has absolute prosecutorial discretion in declining to bring criminal indictments. As in the exercise of any other constitutional power, one may argue that a particular President is "abusing his discretion," but even in such a case, he cannot be compelled to prosecute any criminal charges.

Food for thought.....

Jameson  posted on  2014-11-14   12:40:38 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 9.

#11. To: Jameson (#9)

As in the exercise of any other constitutional power, one may argue that a particular President is "abusing his discretion," but even in such a case, he cannot be compelled to prosecute any criminal charges.

The only way to try to compel him is to use the power of the purse, the threat of impeachment and removal, or the threat to reject his legislative program.

In the current situation, Obama knows that he's not going to get anything through Congress, and he knows that the opposition does not have 67 votes to remove him. Which means that everything comes down to a game of chicken with Congress over government shutdown, or a game of chicken with the Supreme Court over how far they'll tolerate. Obama can issue executive orders to do whatever he wants, really. If the Court won't stop him and Congress won't defund and shut down the government, Obama will get his way for two years.

Vicomte13  posted on  2014-11-14 14:20:04 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#13. To: Jameson (#9)

Chief Law Enforcement Officer. - The President has the sole constitutional obligation to "take care that the laws be faithfully executed,"17 and this grants him broad discretion over federal law enforcement decisions. He has not only the power, but also the responsibility to see that the Constitution and laws are interpreted correctly.18 In addition, the President has absolute prosecutorial discretion in declining to bring criminal indictments. As in the exercise of any other constitutional power, one may argue that a particular President is "abusing his discretion," but even in such a case, he cannot be compelled to prosecute any criminal charges.

Food for thought.....

I seriously doubt that Obama can maintain that the immigration legislation enacted by Congress is unconstitutional.

I question Obama's authority to issue a lawful executive order if it includes some of the broader reaches being speculated. If it is restricted to a directive not to prosecute deportation actions it may survive. If it goes to changing the legal status of 5 million illegal immigrants, I believe it will have difficulty meeting the tests famously set forth by Justice Jackson in his concurring opinion in Youngstown.

https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/343/579/case.html

U.S. Supreme Court

Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 343 U.S. 579 (1952)

Excerpt from concurring opinion of Justice Jackson.

1. When the President acts pursuant to an express or implied authorization of Congress, his authority is at its maximum, for it includes all that he possesses in his own right plus all that Congress can delegate. [Footnote 4/2] In these circumstances,

Page 343 U. S. 636

and in these only, may he be said (for what it may be worth) to personify the federal sovereignty. If his act is held unconstitutional under these circumstances, it usually means that the Federal Government,

Page 343 U. S. 637

as an undivided whole, lacks power. A seizure executed by the President pursuant to an Act of Congress would be supported by the strongest of presumptions and the widest latitude of judicial interpretation, and the burden of persuasion would rest heavily upon any who might attack it.

2. When the President acts in absence of either a congressional grant or denial of authority, he can only rely upon his own independent powers, but there is a zone of twilight in which he and Congress may have concurrent authority, or in which its distribution is uncertain. Therefore, congressional inertia, indifference or quiescence may sometimes, at least, as a practical matter, enable, if not invite, measures on independent presidential responsibility. In this area, any actual test of power is likely to depend on the imperatives of events and contemporary imponderables, rather than on abstract theories of law. [Footnote 4/3]

3. When the President takes measures incompatible with the expressed or implied will of Congress, his power is at its lowest ebb, for then he can rely only upon his own constitutional powers minus any constitutional powers of Congress over the matter. Courts can sustain exclusive presidential control in such a case only by disabling

Page 343 U. S. 638

the Congress from acting upon the subject. [Footnote 4/4] Presidential claim to a power at once so conclusive and preclusive must be scrutinized with caution, for what is at stake is the equilibrium established by our constitutional system.

fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RS20846.pdf

Executive Orders: Issuance, Modification, and Revocation

Vivian S. Chu Legislative Attorney

Todd Garvey Legislative Attorney

April 16, 2014

At page 3

The Supreme Court in Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer established the framework for analyzing whether the President’s issuance of an executive order is a valid presidential action.18 As discussed below, the framework established by Justice Robert H. Jackson in his concurring opinion has become more influential than the majority opinion authored by Justice Hugo Black, and has since been employed by the courts to analyze the validity of controversial presidential actions.

Laurence Tribe, American Constitutional Law, 3rd Ed., Vol. 1, (2000), pg. 424:

Where the Constitution does not itself delegate authority to the President, Congress' failure to authorize the President to take acts of a sort that Article I enumerates as within the legislative sphere is a legal fact that often operates within the Constitutions entire system of allocating and restraining governmental power to deny such authority to the executive. Similarly, against the background of a constitutional rule in the field of foreign policy that the President may make treaties only with the advice and consent of the Senate, senatorial silence—a failure to ratify the treaty—is an operative fact that must be understood as depriving the would-be treaty of legal force.

nolu chan  posted on  2014-11-14 19:40:47 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


End Trace Mode for Comment # 9.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com